WHY MARIJUANA SHOULD BE LEGAL EVERYWHERE

[aociswundumho]

Perhaps someone could weed out cigarette and alcohol consumption with weed legalisation! "Dangerous driving" will no longer be a problem. The new dilemma will be "dangerous parking" where we'll park in the middle of the road to smoke some pot! With the shaman centre they were only ingesting the drug in a monitored area rather than in public. So perhaps it could be the same for medical cannabis being taken in hospitals or the consumption of entheogens at a religious or spiritual service. By contrast alcohol is sold not only in bars but also in off-licence shops. Therefore minors can find it easier to buy the alcohol and cigarettes second-hand from unscrupulous adults coming out of such shops. Plus since it's so widely available they'll be able to try sneak alcohol away from their parent's collection at home.

Here's a crazy idea, why don't you just mind your own business and let each person decide for themselves? Basically you believe that adults aren't mentally competent enough to make decisions regarding their own lives, therefore the state must punish those who make the "wrong" decision with a prison sentence. Your position is nothing but extreme mommy-statism.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Basically you believe that adults aren't mentally competent enough to make decisions regarding their own lives, therefore the state must punish those who make the "wrong" decision with a prison sentence. Your position is nothing but extreme mommy-statism.

You're misreading my position. Young teenagers might not yet have the self-awareness needed to know the risks of drugs and so my previous point revolved around them rather than competent adults. For adults a lot of addicts understand the bad effects and usually dislike the drugs where they merely succumb to temptation when they do take them. So they might find a coerced abstinence policy helpful in the long-term even if it's difficult in the short-term. For "competent" drug users I mentioned the possibility of shaman centres and research labs to prevent the entheogens being used in an escapist or political context outside of meditative spirituality.

"In the 1960s, LSD became the drug of choice for the global counterculture movement. "By the early 60s, the secret or the actual drug escaped the research setting, disseminated into the population at large and became particularly popular among young people ... who had a flair for adventure and exploring new things," says Professor Grob, from California's Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation. He describes the time as a "genuine public health crisis" with unprepared individuals taking the compounds in uncontrolled settings."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-29/rear-vision-history-of-psychedelic-drugs-research/100207362

 

[Michael McMahon]

Juice WRLD - Black and White


Unlike Wiz Khalifa's cannabis songs the above one is about cocaine usage. Notice how the themes of celebratory extroversion, empathy, individualism and rebelliousness soon becomes melancholic with scenes of abandonment, loneliness and burial despite the way cocaine is supposedly meant to make you euphoric. One reason the happiness of drugs might not be sustainable is because of the contrast with your other worries and stresses. The juxtaposition of bliss on the high of a drug followed with the descent back into normality can emphasise the lack of happiness in your normal life. Happiness itself is a sensation of relief and so whether it's a good or bad feeling depends on what exactly the relief is achieved from. Therefore the extent of sadness from drug consumption depends on the individual and their own personal life.

 

[Michael McMahon]

In the name of objectivity these videos display the limitations and risks of a coerced abstinence policy:


Taliban set sights on Afghan drug underworld



Under Taliban, Kabul's drug addicts forced into withdrawal | AFP


The arbitrary and aggressive arrests, physical smacking, insulting language, prolonged 45 day confinement and unaccountable record-keeping for relatives shows the worst-case scenario for a coerced abstinence policy. This is an example of very harsh treatment where there's no medication to wean them off for withdrawal symptoms. However in the past the Taliban have implemented extreme corporal punishment such as amputations and had a very strict interpretation of sharia law. Furthermore neighbouring countries like Saudi Arabia have used the death penalty against drug traffickers along with severe jail sentences for others. So if the abuse in the videos is really the very worst that could happen under coerced abstinence then the slippery slope is not actually as bad compared to the sometimes cruel punishments for drug traffickers and also when we view it in the context of the tens of thousands of deaths from drug cartels in South America or vigilantes in the Philippines or lethal drug overdoses from addicts.

 

[Michael McMahon]

If we could redesign drugs such that they had no physical downsides then there could still be effects on mental well-being. The perceptual confusion a drug could induce might lead to someone to being existentially confused afterwards. Mental illness arising from drugs can be very serious with the risk of prolonged mental anguish and the worst-case scenario of suicide. Moreover there has been rare instances of psychosis and catatonia causing death where the patient might not be able to focus enough to breathe. So a drug can have bad side-effects on mental health even if there's no physical damage directly.

"Catalepsy is a symptom of certain nervous disorders or conditions such as Parkinson's disease and epilepsy. It is also a characteristic symptom of cocaine withdrawal, as well as one of the features of catatonia." (wiki)

 

[BirdinHand]

I'm convinced half the reason we don't see marijuana legal on a federal level is that pharmaceutical companies wouldn't make nearly as much money on antidepressants and antianxiety medications (and then the medications necessary to combat the side effects of those) if individuals had access to marijuana instead.

But hey, pharmaceutical companies have a stronghold on US politicians, so alas, here we are.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Here's a crazy idea, why don't you just mind your own business and let each person decide for themselves?

Drug addiction works through many different ways. I already mentioned rationalisation through repeated exposure. Another possible mechanism is through an apparent increase in autonomy. For instance alcohol not only makes you feel more confident in general but it also works vice versa where your confidence in ingesting the drug increases. In other words you'll be more confident in overcoming the side-effects of the specific drug you've taken even if it's not reflected in reality. This psychological self-determination can be artificial in that you physically might not be able to withstand the social effects of the drug despite your initial expectations. Many people who smoke tobacco might have only started with one cigarette on their first day and within a few months they'd be able to consume multiple cigarettes a day. So they might never have intended to increase the dosage but their ability to withstand the dry taste and difficult breathing has improved. Therefore it might not just be the high of the tobacco that's addictive but also their increased skill level in smoking. A skill in smoking doesn't sound healthy but our brain works by overcoming challenges and smoke is itself a challenge even if it's not an educational one.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Flower Puffs

A "dealer" sold me some traditional Tunisian flowers. Flowers are sometimes associated with femininity but it's possible to "snort" them in a masculine way too! You can place them where they're touching your nose and the pleasent smell can travel to the very back of your nostrils. Buying them for others might sound too romantic but you're free to buy them just for yourself. Petals are nowhere near as mind-altering as alcohol but they're still soothing and better than no stimulus at all. You could take the odd puff along with a cup of tea. Or else you could walk with a bunch of them next to some nice sceney. Perhaps we'd end up replacing a drug addiction with an even worse flower addiction!

"Smokers may find cigarettes easier to resist when they smell things they enjoy like peppermint or chocolate, a small study suggests."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-smoking-cravings-idUSKCN1RT24K

 

[Roadvirus]

Maryland and South Dakota have ballot measure votes for legalization for November. And a couple of other states have them pending per meeting of ballot measure signature requirement deadlines.

 

[Demon]

Maryland and South Dakota have ballot measure votes for legalization for November. And a couple of other states have them pending per meeting of ballot measure signature requirement deadlines.

SD's trying again huh? The voters already had approved it, but the SD gov wouldn't let it be implemented.

 

[Michael McMahon]

I bought one with a "potent" rose-like flower in the middle and "smoking" it made me feel a little bit dizzy and "tipsy" afterwards!

 

[Michael McMahon]

I'll have to stop this flower-drug analogy or else the flowers would be outlawed as date-rape drugs!

 

[Liberal7360]

I live in a state that was second to legalize medical marijuana. We did it through the ballot initiative process. I voted with the majority to legalize it.

We also are tied as being the first state to legalize it for recreational use for those 21 and older. We did it the same way we legalized for medical use. I also voted with the majority to legalize it.

When I voted for medical marijuana I never knew that I would actually need to use it.

But breast cancer and 7 years of the highest dose of a pill form of chemo changed that.

When you wake in the middle of the night choking on vomit you change your mind about marijuana.

When you can't eat anything but lettuce, captain crunch cereal and water without violently vomiting it back up, you change your mind about marijuana.

When you learn that there are side effects of that chemo that don't go away or completely go away when you stop that chemo and you're left with not being able to eat much food without being sick, you change your mind about marijuana.

When a size zero pants are too big on you, you change your mind about marijuana.

There are real medical uses for marijuana. I wish I didn't have to consume it but if I want to keep weight on me, I have to.

As for those who say if it's legalized kids will do it, that didn't stop hundreds of millions of us in the 70s and 80s.

 

[PNW Guy]

I live in a state that was second to legalize medical marijuana. We did it through the ballot initiative process. I voted with the majority to legalize it.

We also are tied as being the first state to legalize it for recreational use for those 21 and older. We did it the same way we legalized for medical use. I also voted with the majority to legalize it.

When I voted for medical marijuana I never knew that I would actually need to use it.

But breast cancer and 7 years of the highest dose of a pill form of chemo changed that.

When you wake in the middle of the night choking on vomit you change your mind about marijuana.

When you can't eat anything but lettuce, captain crunch cereal and water without violently vomiting it back up, you change your mind about marijuana.

When you learn that there are side effects of that chemo that don't go away or completely go away when you stop that chemo and you're left with not being able to eat much food without being sick, you change your mind about marijuana.

When a size zero pants are too big on you, you change your mind about marijuana.

There are real medical uses for marijuana. I wish I didn't have to consume it but if I want to keep weight on me, I have to.

As for those who say if it's legalized kids will do it, that didn't stop hundreds of millions of us in the 70s and 80s.

I too benefit immensely from inhaled cannabis, usually vaporized cannabis. My sponsor in AA, who died, was "old school" said many AA's used pot to help stay sober.

The actual FACT, is, yes, I and others benefit greatly, and because of this, can avoid, dangerous, costly "western medicine" drugs created to "manage symptoms". The medical industrial complex is about profit, not help. I am "habituated" and do have bad anxiety and withdrawal if I quit. Even so, I am not a "pot addict".

Addiction is technically "a pathological relationship with a substance or activity". Pathological means "harmful". I suffer almost no negative effects, so other than cost, the federal governments lies about pot, and refusal to federally legalize, or at minimum decriminalize, or help with the cost of a beneficial medicine, are the only negatives.

I'm narcoleptic, and autistic but have a pot hating stepmother, on a mission to make me quit. The federally funded mental health agency locally has the position that cannabis is harmful to all users mental health. In my legal pot state, authorities still demonize weed and continue to use forcing folks off weed for profit. In this state, they authorities ARE LYING TO US.

Pot benefits my metabolism; helps me lose weight, control "type 2 diabetes", is the only anti anxiety drug that works for me, and helped me get off prescribed morphine that was killing me. Almost all the "problems" I have with pot are other people's uneducated opinions, and desire to "help me" by forcing me to be a guinea pig for butchers we call doctors and pharmaceutical manufacturers, I'd be much less healthy, maybe dead without pot, yet in Washington state, the overzealous libtard nanny state still wants to "help me die" to maximize profit. Hell, I'm more left than right, but WA, is setting up a nanny state and its unconstitutional.

The anti pot rhetoric in this thread is almost pure ignorance and utter garbage.

Especially Michael McMahon, you're talking nonsense about something you fear for god only know what personal ? Your nonsense, unfounded fears about something that probably effects you personally not at all, for some reason in my somewhat studied opinion, makes little sense to me? Why persist , what's in it for you, to judge something you clearly fear and resist trying to begin to understand?

If you like western medicine experimentation with dangerous drugs so they can profit, and you can suffer, maybe die early, be my guest, but please educate yourself and let others do what benefits them, and stop the crusade please. Most of what you've been posting is not remotely reality based.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Especially Michael McMahon, you're talking nonsense about something you fear for god only know what personal ? Your nonsense, unfounded fears about something that probably effects you personally not at all, for some reason in my somewhat studied opinion, makes little sense to me? Why persist , what's in it for you, to judge something you clearly fear and resist trying to begin to understand?

I accept suicide victims and those who engage in self-harm. As such I'm not one to lecture those who engage in self-harm through drugs. Really what I'm saying is society should place mutual responsibility on dealers and users of banned substances to prevent a one-sided penalisation of dealers. Legalising cannabis doesn't bother me. It's society's choice on what drugs are legal. Either legalise it, ban it or regulate it for special circumstances. I don't really agree with half-legalising drugs in an inconsistent way because it leads to uneven jail sentencing. I'm committed to the ideal of proportionality.

 

[Michael McMahon]

please educate yourself and let others do what benefits them, and stop the crusade please. Most of what you've been posting is not remotely reality based.

One way to better understand the culpability of drug crime is to contrast it with sex crime.

Peadophilia as a sexual disposition is not outlawed; rather it's the act of pedophilia that is outlawed. Non-active peadophiles are able to request treatment and counselling without fear of prosecution. Likewise wanting to legalise a drug is not outlawed. Admitting that you're a drug addict needn't be a crime in the same way that people can get amnesty for handing in illegal weapons. Travelling to consume a drug in another constituency where it has been legalised is acceptable. Although it's simply the taking of some drugs in certain jurisdictions that's forbidden.

Child porn is banned where the seller and/or rapist are penalised far more than the buyers of such tapes. This makes sense because the buyer didn't directly abuse the child but nonetheless helped to finance an immoral crime. Therefore a buyer of abusive porn still bears some degree of criminal liability. The consumption of illicit drugs wouldn't necessarily harm anyone else under a free drugs policy. However this is complicated by the fact that by defying drug prohibitions they're indirectly financing drug gangs that are sometimes engaged in unrelated crimes like human trafficking. As we can see the harm to third parties caused by the buying of illicit drugs is far less direct than that caused by the purchasing of child porn.

Prostitution itself isn't always banned and instead it's organised prostitution and brothels that can be banned. Asking to pay someone who isn't an official prostitute might not be a direct crime but perhaps it would fall under sexual harrassment legislation. Pornography is acting in one sense and prostitution in another sense. Thus mild versions of prostitution like chat-up escort services and striptease can sometimes be legal. One argument against prostitution is that impoverished women and beggars are at risk of manipulation. Another risk is of misogyny seeing as men tend to be more sexual than women when it comes to the purchasing of female prostitutes versus male gigolos. Similarly an argument could be made that milder drugs could be tolerated by society while the more hardcore ones might need more regulation or banning.

Contraceptives are legal because it's deemed the pros outweigh the cons. The major benefit was in giving couples more ability to decide how many children they wanted. A con was a risk of objectification in "using" a condom on someone much like drug! Likewise all illicit drugs might have advantages in special circumstances but the question is whether the pros outweigh the cons. For example if you committed yourself to never use crack cocaine more than once every two years then it mightn't be too dangerous. Or if you were a terminally ill patient then having one last heroin-fuelled happy day at the expense of a slightly shortened lifespan might not be too dreadful. However the problem is with regulation where inevitably people will become hooked on such drugs on a daily basis.

 

[Michael McMahon]

The anti pot rhetoric in this thread is almost pure ignorance and utter garbage.

I confess that I often use secondhand drugs through high-octane music! In my music-listening sessions I group songs together according to certain druggy vibes! The song below was in my cocaine session!


Roll Deep - Good Times

"Secondhand smoke is the smoke that you exhale plus the "sidestream" smoke created by the lit end of your cigarette. When friends and family breathe in your secondhand smoke – what we call passive smoking – it isn't just unpleasant for them, it can damage their health too." (nhs)

 

[PNW Guy]

One way to better understand the culpability of drug crime is to contrast it with sex crime.

Peadophilia as a sexual disposition is not outlawed; rather it's the act of pedophilia that is outlawed. Non-active peadophiles are able to request treatment and counselling without fear of prosecution. Likewise wanting to legalise a drug is not outlawed. Admitting that you're a drug addict needn't be a crime in the same way that people can get amnesty for handing in illegal weapons. Travelling to consume a drug in another constituency where it has been legalised is acceptable. Although it's simply the taking of some drugs in certain jurisdictions that's forbidden.

Child porn is banned where the seller and/or rapist are penalised far more than the buyers of such tapes. This makes sense because the buyer didn't directly abuse the child but nonetheless helped to finance an immoral crime. Therefore a buyer of abusive porn still bears some degree of criminal liability. The consumption of illicit drugs wouldn't necessarily harm anyone else under a free drugs policy. However this is complicated by the fact that by defying drug prohibitions they're indirectly financing drug gangs that are sometimes engaged in unrelated crimes like human trafficking. As we can see the harm to third parties caused by the buying of illicit drugs is far less direct than that caused by the purchasing of child porn.

Prostitution itself isn't always banned and instead it's organised prostitution and brothels that can be banned. Asking to pay someone who isn't an official prostitute might not be a direct crime but perhaps it would fall under sexual harrassment legislation. Pornography is acting in one sense and prostitution in another sense. Thus mild versions of prostitution like chat-up escort services and striptease can sometimes be legal. One argument against prostitution is that impoverished women and beggars are at risk of manipulation. Another risk is of misogyny seeing as men tend to be more sexual than women when it comes to the purchasing of female prostitutes versus male gigolos. Similarly an argument could be made that milder drugs could be tolerated by society while the more hardcore ones might need more regulation or banning.

Contraceptives are legal because it's deemed the pros outweigh the cons. The major benefit was in giving couples more ability to decide how many children they wanted. A con was a risk of objectification in "using" a condom on someone much like drug! Likewise all illicit drugs might have advantages in special circumstances but the question is whether the pros outweigh the cons. For example if you committed yourself to never use crack cocaine more than once every two years then it mightn't be too dangerous. Or if you were a terminally ill patient then having one last heroin-fuelled happy day at the expense of a slightly shortened lifespan might not be too dreadful. However the problem is with regulation where inevitably people will become hooked on such drugs on a daily basis.

Cannabis is NOT generally a harmful drug; it's truly not in the same category as other "commonly abused" drugs. Cannabis is much more rarely harmful to users. Most of the negatives are related to legal restrictions arbitrarily put in place for little to no reason and do benefit society at large at all. You simply don't understand cannabis if you see it as a likely addiction or should be illegal. You're just parroting reinforcing misinformation aimed at benefiting profit seeking corporate interest and crooked municipalities aimed at stealing from the citizenry and it'd laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

Your sexual analogous nonsense is just that, reflecting your complete ignorance of cannabis use, and makes no cogent or related point. Please find a less harmful crusade and learn to be a freedom loving American, not a corrupt nanny state supporting fountain of things you so clearly misunderstand...

I won't deny that especially in children starting recreational pot early can be harmful and possibly lead to worse additions in those prone to it, but even so, its context, and in no way should make it illegal . It is just exceedingly rare for pot alone to define as addiction and nearly always is better defined as habituated.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Cannabis is NOT generally a harmful drug; it's truly not in the same category as other "commonly abused" drugs.

One solution to dugs is that if you as an individual view yourself as an exception then the very best solution is to visit a region where it's legal in a regulated way. For example prostitution is dangerous not because of women but because of the inherent strength imbalance with men. Thus someone who is adamant about being a prostitute should work in a safe and vetted environment. The trouble is that everything has downsides and upsides. So we often just need to respect democracy and advocate change if we don't agree with it. Any drug can be very dangerous to some people and not as much to others.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Your sexual analogous nonsense is just that, reflecting your complete ignorance of cannabis use, and makes no cogent or related point.

Perhaps we could end drinking culture by replacing it with social porn groups. People would meet in bars and discuss porn magazines over fruit juices. The sports games on restaurant televisions would have intermittent porn adverts. It'd just be accepted that as so many people watch porn in private that no one had to physically relieve themselves publicly when porn was being viewed together. Everyone would live in a really blasé society full of casual porn jokes on serious issues like drug debates. Married people would be able to excuse each other viewing public displays of porn by taking no notice of it out of desensitisation during their teenage years.

Eminem - Role Model

 

[Michael McMahon]

Incredibly after the 8th repeat of Eminem's Role Model song I reawakened memories of my months wandering Porto in Portugal last year. The apathy of the music evoked really vivid imagery of my bemusement travelling to various hostels around the city! I never realised my situation was almost as absurd as the song while I introspected on my life's plans during my time abroad!

 

[Michael McMahon]

The drugs war isn't inevitable when we look at moderate Islamic countries. The economy and climate of Turkey is similar to Mexico. Turkey is helped by their proximity to Europe yet Mexico should be even more prosperous when they're directly bordering America. Needless to say the gang violence in Mexico is orders of magnitude worse than Turkey. Stricter versions of Islam can be very harsh towards drug dealers in countries like Saudi Arabia where they've the death penalty. Yet they still never stoop as low as outright vigilante culture like the Philippines. Islam can be consistently authoriatarian towards criminals but never volatile beyond comprehension. The Catholic doctrine of total forgiveness within the material world rather than just the afterlife means they're liable to forgive vigilantes as much as drug dealers in the courts. The Catholic Church was much stricter in the past though we all know how that aggravated the child abuse scandals. Nonetheless the Catholic church really has to revise and reinterpret its dogma in order to be strict again in a safer way. There are too many 2nd and 3rd world Catholic countries gone AWOL with gang warfare.

"Pope Francis has urged mafia members to stop blaspheming against God and to embrace love and service.
He was paying homage to Father Giuseppe Puglisi who was shot dead by the mafia in Sicily 25 years ago."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45532906

"Filipino Bishop Pablo Virgilio David is on the front-lines of a campaign to stop extra-judicial killings as part of government crackdown on illegal drugs. He told Vatican News that Pope Francis said he is praying for him, and that the Pope has encouraged him to be a prophetic voice for human rights and dignity."
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/churc...david-kaloocan-philippines-pope-drug-war.html

 

[Michael McMahon]

I tried to infiltrate the lucrative Central and South American drug trade!

I sent a few letters to Portugal in case Brazil had to be re-invaded to enforce law and order(!):

I added in a few of my dreaming philosophy posts as a diversion against any scathing drug cartel readers!

Protestants took the easy option by leaving the Catholic Church. By contrast lapsed Catholics have to try and commandeer the Catholic Church to prevent an implosion! I could forgive Mao for tyrannising China and declare myself the most forgiving person ever. Yet this wouldn't be a fully honest gesture when I don't know any of the victims nor have I ensure that China won't repeat such atrocities. As such forgiveness has to be counterbalanced with other virtues like charity in order to empathise with both victims and repentant perpetrators. Forgiveness by itself might not be a sufficient defence against evil when it comes to murderous drug cartels. South America has the highest percentage of Catholics than any other continent and yet was plagued by brutal civil wars during the Cold War. The Catholic Church must be more proactive in arbitrating such conflicts in South America. Being bored in Europe and America while fellow Catholics are in peril in the developing and third world would undermine the faith.


"is there anything to be said for saying another mass" - Fr Ted

 

[Michael McMahon]

An objective distinction between porn and prostitution is that in theory only married couple could be allowed make porn. For example poor people living in tenements long ago might have had no choice but to overhear other people have sex. By contrast prostitution can be harder to regulate when evil people can be doubly hedonistic about sex and be a violent threat to prostitutes. Much like a CCTV camera pornographers have more security when video recorders and other managers are around. A coerced abstinence policy could work for prostitutes living in dangerous areas when the prostitutes themselves are not necessarily being violent nor deserving of jail. Paying someone of the opposite gender to be a friend technically isn't prostitution but represents a tolerable spectrum of "hostess" flirtation. A dilemma with strip clubs is that the frustration of constant arousal might only work if your spouse was at home to sexually relieve you which isn't very faithful. As such the spectrum of mild prostitution can be subjective from a legal standpoint.

'The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart's concurrence, stating that the Constitution protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography". He wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."'

'A hostess club is a type of night club found primarily in Japan. They employ primarily female staff and cater to men seeking drinks and attentive conversation.' Wiki

Technically anyone wanting a prostitute could technically just make a porno which is why coerced abstinence or curtailments might sometimes be necessary if everyone abused porn. For example point of view pornography isn't very self-sacrificing where a slippery slope is apparent.

Piper Perri

 

[snakestretcher]

An objective distinction between porn and prostitution is that in theory only married couple could be allowed make porn. For example poor people living in tenements long ago might have had no choice but to overhear other people have sex. By contrast prostitution can be harder to regulate when evil people can be doubly hedonistic about sex and be a violent threat to prostitutes. Much like a CCTV camera pornographers have more security when video recorders and other managers are around. A coerced abstinence policy could work for prostitutes living in dangerous areas when the prostitutes themselves are not necessarily being violent nor deserving of jail. Paying someone of the opposite gender to be a friend technically isn't prostitution but represents a tolerable spectrum of "hostess" flirtation. A dilemma with strip clubs is that the frustration of constant arousal might only work if your spouse was at home to sexually relieve you which isn't very faithful. As such the spectrum of mild prostitution can be subjective from a legal standpoint.

'The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart's concurrence, stating that the Constitution protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography". He wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."'

'A hostess club is a type of night club found primarily in Japan. They employ primarily female staff and cater to men seeking drinks and attentive conversation.' Wiki

Technically anyone wanting a prostitute could technically just make a porno which is why coerced abstinence or curtailments might sometimes be necessary if everyone abused porn. For example point of view pornography isn't very self-sacrificing where a slippery slope is apparent.
View attachment 67451631
Piper Perri

Who the hell calls their kid 'Piper'? A plumber?